Broadband conflicts between city government and private providers may determine future of internet

• A hundred years ago, when Louisiana was still literally in the dark, residents of Lafayette banded together to build a city-owned electric utility where once there was little more than swampland.
• The Bells and cable companies, for their part, argue that government intervention in their business is not justified and say they are far better equipped to operate complex and far-flung data networks.
• At stake is the fate of high-speed Internet access for millions of Americans, hinging on a fundamental question of civics and economics--whether the government or private industries should take the leading role in building out what's considered this generation's critical infrastructure challenge.
• In some cases, local governments have simply stepped into a vacuum left by commercial providers that have proved slow or unwilling to bring broadband to their residents.
• But the situation has grown more complicated with public broadband proposals in major cities already served by private industry.
• Oftentimes, what begins as a project of one side eventually falls into the hands of the other: The railroad system was first constructed by private companies but is now controlled largely by the federal government, while the postal system is run by Washington but faces stiff competition from private couriers such as FedEx and United Parcel Service of America.
• As is the goal with many municipal projects, the city hopes that its planned wireless broadband network will put it on the map as one of the most technologically advanced cities in the world.
• Other Bells and cable companies have thrown their weight behind similar state bills that bar municipalities from building networks.
• Twenty states have already passed, or are trying to push through, legislation that would impose heavy restrictions on communities creating their own networks in areas already served by Bells and cable companies.